DAVID RYAN
v.
THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST COMPANY, N.A., ETC.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A trial court has no authority to reconsider and void a prior final order that vacated a foreclosure judgment, as the finality of judgments precludes relitigation of matters previously adjudicated with finality.
[1] A trial court lacks authority to reconsider and nullify a prior final order that vacated a judgment, as the finality of judgments precludes relitigation of matters previo…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The finality of judgments is of great import even when the judgments may have been wrongly decided.”
Court's reasoning regarding the importance of finality in preventing relitigation of prior orders
David Ryan appealed a circuit court decision regarding a foreclosure matter involving The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company. The case involved a p…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Finality Of Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed April 30, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D24-0022 Lower Tribunal No. 19-9635 ________________
David Ryan, Appellant,
vs.
The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A., etc., Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Antonio Arzola, Judge.
Quaranta P.A., and John M. Quaranta, for appellant.
Greenberg Traurig, P.A., and Kimberly S. Mello (Orlando), for appellee.
Before EMAS, SCALES and MILLER, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
2 Affirmed. See Bank of Am., N.A. v. Abpaymar, LLC, 373 So. 3d 669, 670 (Fla. 5th DCA 2023) (“The central issue is whether the current trial court had the power to revisit and nullify the 2011 order that vacated the 2006 final judgment of foreclosure and returned the original note and mortgage to Countrywide (who subsequently assigned the documents to BOA). It did not. The trial court mistakenly relitigated the procedural validity of the 2011 vacation order, a matter previously adjudicated with finality; it had no authority to reconsider the order and deem it ‘ineffectual’ and thereby ‘void and of no force or effect’ because of its view that Countrywide set forth inadequate grounds for the relief obtained. This court has reiterated that the finality of judgments is of great import even when the judgments may have been wrongly decided.”).